The resignation of Mr. Justice Flood from the Flood tribunal has clearly caused confusion among the public and in political circles. It is very important that there be absolute clarity about how we proceed from here and what the current position is. Whatever else about their views on the tribunal, it is clear that the public do not want the taxpayer to have to take up the cost of payment of those who were deemed to have clearly obstructed the findings of the tribunal, whether those costs be €10,000 or €10 million.
Last week we had some very confusing statements from the Taoiseach and members of Government on this matter. On Tuesday the Taoiseach said that if Mr. Justice Flood did not deal with the costs issue, a question clearly arises. Also on Tuesday, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Cullen, said that legislation would be required to reduce "as best we can" the risks of legal challenge arising from a new chairman dealing with the costs element. On Wednesday the Taoiseach said that if Mr. Justice Flood did deal with costs, it would avoid legal complications. However, on Friday, following his resignation both as chairman and as a member of the tribunal, the Taoiseach indicated that there are no legal impediments to a new incoming chairman dealing with the issue of costs.
I wish to find out from the Taoiseach what, in his best estimation, the position now is. Is it clearly the case that he has discovered that there is no legal restriction or complication, as distinct from impediment, upon a new chairman dealing with the costs element of this tribunal? Any Member of the House might not have a legal impediment imposed upon him or her in dealing with the costs, but it does not remove the element of legal charge after legal charge arising as a consequence.
If legislation is necessary, and there is no legal impediment involved, why can we not have this legislation this week and allow the work of the tribunal to continue unimpeded?